guildwarsfandomcom-20200222-history
User talk:Entropy/Archive 25
UTC, the of , . My timezone is UTC - 8 hours. Have a nice day!}} }} First Lord Belar 02:09, 6 December 2007 (UTC) :Second?-- (Talk) ( ) 02:09, 6 December 2007 (UTC) ::third Cress Arvein 02:10, 6 December 2007 (UTC) :::fourth. --Hellbringer loves emo slut druggies (T/ ) 02:10, 6 December 2007 (UTC) ::::fifth. ECs ftl --Shadowcrest 02:12, 6 December 2007 (UTC) :::::Thank you all for helping fight the vandal(s). GuildWiki couldn't function without you. (T/ ) 02:12, 6 December 2007 (UTC) ::::::Dang, I missed all the fun!-- (Talk) ( ) 02:13, 6 December 2007 (UTC) :::::::You can watch RC for any new IPs posting to my or Hell's talk and ban them. I need a minute to check for missed damages. (T/ ) 02:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC) ::::::(2xEC)It could, but it would end up looking like myspace. Lord Belar 02:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC) :::::::::you wish IP. and so true belar--Shadowcrest 02:15, 6 December 2007 (UTC) ::::::::::Yikes, that's a scary thought, Belar.-- (Talk) ( ) 02:16, 6 December 2007 (UTC) :::::::::::Thanks for keeping my talk page clean o.O - I could probably hazard a guess to who random IP is this time but I doubt it'd be very constructive. Jennalee 02:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC) ::::::::::::Another angry SodM member? >.> (T/ ) 02:26, 6 December 2007 (UTC) :::::::::::::SodM? Lord Belar 02:30, 6 December 2007 (UTC) :::::::::::::Nop, I don't think the majority of our members are inclined to behave immaturely, but someone else who was more recent around here. Viper should know *cough* Jennalee 02:41, 6 December 2007 (UTC) ::::::::::::::Well, if you want more targets for banhammer, see User talk:Ravenjwolfe and then . Jennalee 17:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC) ::::::::::::::No. Ban imminent Cress Arvein 02:38, 6 December 2007 (UTC) (RI) Heh, to quote this page's history notes - "soz to Gem, Entrea, Shadowcrest, and Hell. Mr. Vandal: I do not like you. I do not respect you. You are unworthy to even post on my talkpage".(and, er, ;) - What about me? I even reverted your user page and almost got RSI thanks to Mr IP. Don't I get no admin-love? Hehe --'''Snograt'' 13:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC) :i got RSI. do i get admin-love?--Mr Ex Vandal 23:23, 6 December 2007 (UTC) ::I'm not sure you want it, lol. I quote: "Banning is my way of showing affection, honey. I'll belive you're a changed person if you stop using proxy IPs. :) (T/ ) 02:21, 6 December 2007 (UTC)" --Shadowcrest 23:26, 6 December 2007 (UTC) :::I <3 being banned, it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. --Mr Ex Vandal 23:28, 6 December 2007 (UTC) Hey Please stop banning me. I am a changed person. I am not vandalizing pages. And I love you very much. :Hey, look, a flying pig! Lord Belar 02:19, 6 December 2007 (UTC) ::for some strange reason I find both those statements hard to believe... --Shadowcrest 02:20, 6 December 2007 (UTC) :::Hmmm Cress Arvein 02:20, 6 December 2007 (UTC) ::::Banning is my way of showing affection, honey. I'll belive you're a changed person if you stop using proxy IPs. :) (T/ ) 02:21, 6 December 2007 (UTC) ::::(Fucking EC)There could be a reason for that... Lord Belar 02:22, 6 December 2007 (UTC) :::::Banning is how you show your affection? God damnit, and I thought you loved me --Blue.rellik 02:30, 6 December 2007 (UTC) ::::::Masochistic calling for the banstick are we? Jennalee 02:42, 6 December 2007 (UTC) ::::::She must love IPs a lot rofl. I <3 Entropy banning. --Hellbringer loves emo slut druggies (T/ ) 02:31, 6 December 2007 (UTC) :::::::No, Hell. You ♥ Emo Slut-Druggies.-- (Talk) ( ) 02:33, 6 December 2007 (UTC) ::::::::Oh yeah. Forgot about that. --Hellbringer loves emo slut druggies (T/ ) 02:41, 6 December 2007 (UTC) Ugh, what a day. I can't believe how much work it is to be an admin sometimes. It just makes me appreciate people like Karlos and Skuld and Gares and Gem and...yeah, all the old admins. It makes me appreciate them more now that I know some of what they went through all the time. I really miss them. :( Thanks again everyone... /signoff (T/ ) 03:20, 6 December 2007 (UTC) :Crazy day, eh? Wish we had all of those big-hitters that you mentioned still with us, too. -- (Talk) ( ) 03:21, 6 December 2007 (UTC) ::Woot lets do that again lol. Pull out those banhammers like crazy. --Hellbringer loves emo slut druggies (T/ ) 03:23, 6 December 2007 (UTC) :::Yeah, pick a random person tomorrow and ban them. I nominate you. :P Lord Belar 03:51, 6 December 2007 (UTC) :::: But Gem is back. — Nova — ( ) 23:09, 6 December 2007 (UTC) :::::lol if you want there to be more admins i'll volunteer. I was just looking at the active admin list and realized just how short it is. ^_^ —[[User:JediRogue|'♥Jedi♥Rogue♥']] 23:12, 6 December 2007 (UTC) ::::::ME + MP will bash and win over you all! Mwahahahahahahhaha.... Umm... Hi? -- (gem / talk) 23:17, 6 December 2007 (UTC) Good thing... ...you don't care about GWW, because Raptor stole your name over there. Your alter-ego is now a vandal's sock-puppet. Entropy on GuildWiki = everyone's favorite admin. Entropy on Guild Wars Wiki = loathed. Just thought that was kind of funny. [[user:Entrea Sumatae|'Entrea Sumatae']] [Talk] 00:34, 7 December 2007 (UTC) UNFAIR Quote from User_talk:Mr_Ex_Vandal: "It only took so long because, technically, the ban isnt protected under policy. But for that much BS, besically we just said "f*ck policy" and banned him. --Shadowcrest 02:02, 7 December 2007 (UTC)" That sounds unfair. :( --194.54.189.173 02:07, 7 December 2007 (UTC) :Fair has nothing to do with it. Admins can do whatever they want, whenever they want, and you can't do anything about it. --Macros 02:08, 7 December 2007 (UTC) ::Who cares? It's another Raptors. And I don't trust you, considering you showed up right after I banned him, and your only edit is about him. Same goes for the IP who posted the exact same message on Gem's talk page.-- (Talk) ( ) 02:09, 7 December 2007 (UTC) :::GW:YAV --85.25.141.60 02:11, 7 December 2007 (UTC) ::::GW:ADMIN --Macros 02:13, 7 December 2007 (UTC) ::::GW:YAV --195.141.76.131 02:13, 7 December 2007 (UTC) ::::Vandals are not. --Shadowcrest 02:12, 7 December 2007 (UTC) ::::I never said that your opinion doesn't matter, I simply stated I don't trust many IPs right now.-- (Talk) ( ) 02:12, 7 December 2007 (UTC) :::::And, IP, whoever you are, this is thte second vandalism filled night in a row, by mainly IPs. You picked a bad time to act mysteriously. --Shadowcrest 02:14, 7 December 2007 (UTC) ::::::WTF? ARE YOU RETARDED OR WHAT? ITS OBVIOUSLY ME -.- --195.141.76.131 02:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC) :::::::For the last time: FUCK OFF. YOU ARE NO LONGER WELCOME HERE. Lord Belar 02:16, 7 December 2007 (UTC) ::::::::Yeah fuck off and stop infaming us anons!! 169.231.5.83 02:17, 7 December 2007 (UTC) :::::::::Changing ips doesn't help. Lord Belar 02:18, 7 December 2007 (UTC) :::::::::And it's defame, not infame. Lord Belar 02:18, 7 December 2007 (UTC) ::::::::::http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Infame - Learn english. --62.129.164.190 02:20, 7 December 2007 (UTC) :::::::::::"Infame: To defame" Read your own links. Lord Belar 02:22, 7 December 2007 (UTC) :::::::::::YEAH AND INFAME IS CORRECT TOO. SO STFU :] --85.25.141.60 02:24, 7 December 2007 (UTC) ::::::::::::srsly-- (Talk) ( ) 02:22, 7 December 2007 (UTC) :::::::::::::Shush and leave the wiki. for good, IP. --Shadowcrest 02:22, 7 December 2007 (UTC) Wow, much of this is just trolling. Please tell me you're going to get rid of this whole section, Entropy?-- (Talk) ( ) 02:26, 7 December 2007 (UTC) :Wanna hide that you banned an user for breaking NO policy, huh? Nice :) Well, I gotta sleep so good night. Se you tomorrow! --169.231.5.83 02:28, 7 December 2007 (UTC) ::Not rlly. I just think that this whole section is pointless to keep, and doesn't really show a good community to any new users looking on this page.-- (Talk) ( ) 02:29, 7 December 2007 (UTC) :::We'll see. Nite! ::::Honestly, IP, NO ONE is going to back you up on this one. In fact, show me 10 people on the wiki who will believe you who are not sock puppets, and I'll leave you alone. Which leads me to my next point; sockpuppetry can get you banned. --Shadowcrest 02:32, 7 December 2007 (UTC) :::::Yep, it can. Oh, wait, IT JUST DID. Lord Belar 02:33, 7 December 2007 (UTC) ::::::God I'm getting sick of all this shit.-- (Talk) ( ) 02:34, 7 December 2007 (UTC) :::::::With the exception of the vandal, we all are. Lord Belar 02:35, 7 December 2007 (UTC) ::::::::Poor Entropy, all this crap always happens on her page. --Shadowcrest 02:36, 7 December 2007 (UTC) :::::::::There should be a User talk:Entropy/Real talk, so all the shit can go here, and the conversations can continue undisturbed. Lord Belar 02:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC) ::::::::::Actually, that's not so bad of an idea. The only thing for me would be its harder to get to, but if I had all this vandal crap going on my talk, I'd probably do that. --Shadowcrest 02:42, 7 December 2007 (UTC) :For what it's worth ... this wiki isn't the GWW, and not bound by the same policy mistakes over there that handcuff their sysops over there into being little more than glorified janitors. :On this wiki, per policy: Administrators can ban users at will. This is usually done in cases of vandalism, and permanent bans are usually reserved for spambots. However, if an administrator feels it prudent, he may remove a user from the wiki for any reason, or no reason at all.. If someone is being a disruptive force on this wiki - they can and should be banned. --- Barek (talk • ) - 05:55, 7 December 2007 (UTC) ::Personally I didn't see the account MR Ex Vandal disturbing. The IPs are a lot more disturbing. So I'm unbanning the account in hoipes of getting him back to it instead of multiple IPs. -- (gem / talk) 10:02, 7 December 2007 (UTC) :::I wasn't commenting on the bans themselves - I haven't reviewed the posts myself - I'm not an admin, so I'll leave that task to those who are ;-) I was just pointing out the policy line above, because there seemed to be debate on if the bans could be done. --- Barek (talk • ) - 15:03, 7 December 2007 (UTC) ::::Ok. :) I wasn't commenting to anyone specifically either, it was just an announcement for anyone who thought that the unbanning was weird. -- (gem / talk) 22:03, 7 December 2007 (UTC) What the hell were you people thinking? -.- I stand by Gem's decision on this one... It's true, that I banned a lot of random IPs also a few nights ago. To argue my side, it was obvious that they were the same person. We don't have a GW:SOCK but I felt justified since it was clear the vandal was simply using alternate IPs to continue and harrass the Wiki. Now, when Mr. Ex Vandal was created, I stated on his talkpage that I didn't particularly care for his style of editing, especially his not-quite-bannable disrespect for GW:RFA and other users, but at the same time if he was truly of a mind to reform I would welcome him with open arms as much as possible. People can change, sometimes drastically, and you have to take their word for it until evidence proves otherwise. If Mr. Ex Vandal had actually broken a policy, then yes, he would deserve a ban. But "baiting" other users or admins into making fools of themselves is not a bannable offense. You people chose to say what you did, not because Mr. Ex Vandal made you say it, but because that is how you actually felt. I have tried over and over again to advocate respect and tolerance towards anons and fringe users of the Wiki (User talk:NanoWarrior, User talk:Mr Ex Vandal, User talk:LostBlue when he was still an anon), because you can judge a community not by how it treats those best off (err...not Gravewit in this case >.>), but by how it treats those most disadvantaged or unliked. It is true that I go all-out and pretty much break GW:NPA when dealing with vandals. "Fuck off" is certainly not a constructive summary for banning. However, those sorts of times, I have made absolutely certain that I really am banning a vandal, one who has showed contempt and disrespect for our policies and the Wiki in general. I am not necessarily saying that it is okay to sink to their level, but GW:YAV does not cover vandals who will return your insults word for word given half a chance...that would be overextention of a policy, using it for something it was not intended for. But, even though we pretty much go by vigilante justice here, we do have standards. We have guidelines for what is a bannable offense and what is not. We do not abuse GW:ADMIN for our own selfish purposes, and say "Admins can do whatever they want" to justify an otherwise uncalled for ban. We look for evidence before banning someone - why do you think admins are reminded to check the contribs before banning? To put it plainly, we have a great priviledge called administrative discretion, and when that gets abused I start to seriously consider whether we ought to have it. Perhaps GWW is in the right, after all. It is very sad to say so, but maybe we do need to have policies defining everything. If people cannot use their own good judgment to make decisions any more (and I am not just talking about Marcopolo here), then we should be stripped of that power. *'Innocent until proven guilty' *'Admins have the same amount of clout as normal users' *'Preemtive bans are unacceptable' (User:Raptors is an extraordinary exception) Is it really so hard to follow these simple rules? I am disappointed in all of you, but especially myself for not being a good enough role model. (T/ ) 08:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC) Gigathrash Marcopolo broke something (someone?) and doesn't know how to fix it.--Carmine 05:51, 7 December 2007 (UTC) :Problem fixed, I'm not banned anymore =D (long story)-- igathrashTalk^ 01:29, 8 December 2007 (UTC) Eivittu perkele saatana Gods, I leave the wiki for one night, and all this has to happen again? I have a real life, too :( I'm sorry that I can't deal with things right now, but hopefully there will be time over the weekend. I apologize for my spotty attendance record of late, and would like to thank Marcopolo for taking up the slack where I leave off. (T/ ) 14:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC) :Heehee, that's probably more than can be said for some of us ;p - maybe you should consider removing that userbox, you know which one Jennalee 14:48, 7 December 2007 (UTC) ::Why finnish?? Falafel 18:51, 7 December 2007 (UTC) :::It's the only language that can truly express my frustration at the moment. (T/ ) 08:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC) ... See my userpage plz.-- (Talk) ( ) 00:27, 9 December 2007 (UTC) :Marco, just because you let one guy get to you and make you break like 15 policies isnt a cause to go and delete your userpage! Anyway, GW:RFA ftw. EDIT: my new sig ftw as well.. -- Warwick (Talk) ( ) (My RFA! (vote support) 07:43, 9 December 2007 (UTC) ::Fuck. And no, Warwick, I don't think you're qualified. You are just not experienced enough. Though I do appreciate the gesture - it shows you care about the Wiki and want to help out. (T/ ) 08:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC) :::Z0mg entropy, was that a Personal Attack against MP47? =O -- Warwick (Talk) ( ) (My RFA! (vote support) 08:09, 9 December 2007 (UTC) ::::Not in a joking mood at the moment. Fuck is a general way of expressing exasperation and discontent. (T/ ) 08:11, 9 December 2007 (UTC) :::::I know, it was intended as a joke.. Whats wrong? Anything i can help with? I'm bored enough to do almost anything.. -- Warwick (Talk) ( ) (My RFA! (vote support) 08:12, 9 December 2007 (UTC) ::::::Well, other than the fact that I'm posting at midnight and have bad sickness in RL - you could start with reading what I posted above, and perhaps Marcopolo's talkpage as well, and surmise from that that I am not very happy at the moment. (T/ ) 08:15, 9 December 2007 (UTC) :::::::Okay, okay.. Geez, dont get stroppy.. I was only trying to help.. -- Warwick (Talk) ( ) (My RFA! (vote support) 08:16, 9 December 2007 (UTC) ::::::::...Stroppy? (T/ ) 08:22, 9 December 2007 (UTC) :::::::::well.. yeah.. -- Warwick (Talk) ( ) (My RFA! (vote support) 08:23, 9 December 2007 (UTC) ::::::::::What does that mean? I have never heard the term before. (T/ ) 08:27, 9 December 2007 (UTC) :::::::::::Annoyed/Irritated for no particularly good reason. -- Warwick (Talk) ( ) (My RFA! (vote support) 08:28, 9 December 2007 (UTC)